How Much Description is too Much?

I don't honestly know how much description is too much.  But I do know that every author has strengths and weaknesses. I know that the business of writing is filled with distinct individuals. I know that some authors can use massive blocks of description effectively and others cannot. It really depends on the author.

I know what I expect as a reader and reviewer though. I know that what separates the excellent writer from the good one is the drive for improvement. The excellent writers are never content with their writing. They constantly strive to provide the reader with better work and this is what the reader and reviewer want.

In the area of writing description there is always room for improvement. But there is also a basic reality to what the reader expects. Now, granted, the reader is an individual as well and some may be more tolerant than others, but here is the basic reality: The reader expects description to put them into the story, but not distract from it.

Some authors have their strong point in dialogue and action. Others have their strong point in description. Two authors whose strength is in description are T.A. Barron and Stephen Lawhead. They are masters at it. But both of their styles are wildly different.

T.A. Barron tends to have lengthier description sections and more often, but his language is so magnificent and easy to read that the reader hardly notices the absence of dialogue for a few pages.

Stephen Lawhead is a more balanced writer between dialogue and description, but he does have a strength is description. He is able to  describe a scene vividly using unexpected details that successfully cast an image into the mind of his reader.

These two authors represent what I  expect as a reader and reviewer. They use description effectively and are able to keep the reader's mind in the plot and run of the story. Scenes in writing are much like scenes in plays. The set (description) is in the background. It enhances, sets-up, and frames the scene, but it does not distract from the actors (characters.) This is what the reader expects from a writer in regards to description.

The Writing of Characters

When I read a book I always consider it an adventure I have chosen to go on. I look to the author and say, "guide me." And guiding me is all I expect the author to do. I expect to be shown the story that is the adventure, but I want to see and understand some things on my own. Authors should not be tedious tour guides. We, the readers, have a lust for the juicy parts of the adventure and it is what we expect to get. We want to experience some things on our own. We have imagination too.

This week I plan to write about what the reader expects from a writer. I have some authority is this subject since I am an avid reader and honest, sometimes brutally, book reviewer. Today's post concerns characters. Particularly what the reader expects in regards to how the author presents characters to the reader through dialogue.

Museums are a useful illustration for how readers should see characters. A typical museum display contains a small plaque that tells about the display. These plaques allow the reader to see more into the aspects of the display than the tour guide point out. Writing characters works the same way.

You can tell your reader a few of the prominent details about a character, but they do not want to be bored by every little detail. Some good details that you can give the reader safely are the eye color and the height. You could even say a character is handsome or beautiful, but you must allow the reader to imagine what they believe the character looks like overall. This aspect makes the character, especially the main protagonist, more personal and encourages the reader to care for them. 

One thing that we rarely obtain from a museum is how the people in the displays lived and acted. We cannot understand the full character of someone just by looking at physical appearance. You see, if you look at a mummy in a coffin…I mean sarcophagus…you would not say, “He’s a funny fella.”

The only way you could possibly know the character/personality of whoever that mummy was would be to don a lab coat, construct a time machine, and travel back in time to ancient Egypt. Then, if you don’t get stuck in a desert or killed by nomads, you have to find out who that mummy was when he lived. In all likelihood it will be some pharaoh and you would never get to him. Even if you did find the man-before-the-mummy, you would have to get close to him and follow him around before you ever truly got to know him.

Reflecting on the past illustration, our job as writers is to spare the reader from having to do anything remotely similar to that. We can grant them immediate access into the most personal recesses of a character’s life. We do this through dialogue. No reader is going to want to be told that Jason argued with his wife and left her. The reader wants to hear the argument, see the pain, and watch as Jason leaves. Now if the main protagonist was Jason’s wife, and the reader had already developed a love for her, imagine how deeply emotional that scene would be.

It is also easier to discover a character’s past through dialogue and it is infinitely less boring. I’m not suggesting that a character details everything about his past to someone he just met, but the author could let a little slip and then allow the reader to fill in some minor details based on what they already know about the character.

These have been speculations with Joshua A. Spotts, tune in next time…

Research in Fantasy Writing

How important do you imagine research to be? I know how important I feel it is. Very. I know some people, who will remain nameless, who believe that research is a waste of time for short story writing or fantasy novels. There is nothing farther from the truth.

 Recently I wrote a short story for a competition. It had to be based on the Titanic. I wanted my work to look professional. I wanted it to be flawless. I spent several hours one night over Christmas break just reading information about the Titanic. By the time I was done with the research I was able to sit down and write my entire story in a single sitting. It actually made the writing easier since I knew more than enough details about the Titanic and its crew. Also, for once in a rare time, I was satisfied with my work.

By common sense research is necessary for things like Magazine article writing, modern or historical based novels, and research papers (duh!) But the one fact that must never be overlooked in research's necessity in fantasy writing.

Research for fantasy writing often takes a different twist than research for the things I've listed above. In fact it even defies the common conception of research.

Fantasy research involves studying people, which is fun, analyzing their conversations, developing characters from their faults, all that fun stuff. Fantasy must have believable characters that the reader can attach to. This is achieved by the research into real people.

Fantasy research also involves studying the world around you. The fantasy writer needs to be able to describe new things straight from his imagination. Thus the fantasy writer needs to study their surrounding and be able to describe them. How else, if the writer cannot do that, can the writer describe something no one has ever seen before?

Finally, fantasy research involves bookstores. Find out what has been written before.  Know what fantasy ideas are original. People always enjoy a fresh, brand new fantasy.  Also find out what trends are selling. I am not advising you to write a Twilight novel, but you can create something original along the same line of a selling book trend. It just takes some work and some research.